Considered changes to the ELO banning system

Over time, this particular game mode has undergone several changes that have largely proved to be successful. So this is where we are currently at:

- We’ve reached the point where there are almost 1,000 cards available in the format and in which "optimized" decks exist by mixing up clans. It would seem that "historic" cards (ones that are several years’ old) have an unchallenged place in decks that work well in ELO and, as a result, are greatly limiting the emergence of new deck types.

- The format has dramatically improved with the arrival of new clans and particularly new cards which mean that decks can be significantly improved (it is now possible to produce a proficient deck from each clan). By this, we’re not referring to stomp decks used to race to the top of the rankings, but rather to decks that work well in the ELO mode.

- More effective cards per clan also means greater possibilities of monoclan domination.

Our current aim is to give the ELO mode room to expand and evolve by adding a criterion to staff bans.

So this is what we propose to breathe new life into the ELO mode:

The age of cards will become an important factor in what we decide to ban from the ELO mode. The older a card is, the more it runs the risk of being banned. This will enable us to dislodge certain cards that have become fixtures in ELO decks and, in doing so, make way for new cards to emerge.

We will select between 0 and 4 cards per clan (at each wave of bans) which we can ban based on this criterion.

For example, let’s take a look at an All Stars deck that is currently very effective in ELO. Marina (2007), Jessie (2008 ) and Randy (2008 ) very often have a place in their star category. If we ban Marina and Randy, Nathan might find his place or would at least have the chance of doing so. In the same way, the presence of Uranus partly prevents the creation of a new reducer for the Sakrohm clan because of his dominance. Several cards may not seem worth considering because of their direct competition within the clan. However, we believe they could provide interesting alternatives (I'm thinking here of Leviatonn VS Klawz or Stalfhaust).

This new criterion of play would allow us to better manage the game's evolution. We would fix dates for new bans every X months, of course taking the time to first discuss this with the community, as we did with the last wave of bans.

Banned "historic" cards would then be definitively expelled from the ELO mode.

In short this new system would allow us to:
- Refresh the ELO mode on a regular basis by providing genuine renewal to the metagame.
- Give new character cards a chance to make their mark on the game mode.
- Allow new deck types to emerge by combining the various clans without having to play/challenge certain unavoidable cards (by getting rid of “historic” cards, players would have more scope for creativity).
- Reduce the power of monoclans in the game mode.

Initially, each clan would not be affected in the same way but over time a real change in the mode’s playstyle could emerge.
Ultimately we feel these suggested changes will provide ELO devotees with yet more scope for discovery and enjoyment.

These are our proposals. We very much look forward to hearing any comments or suggestions you may have on them.

Also, if they do these bans they better balance them so all the clans get hit equally.
Pretty ridiculous how these bans would kill clans like Sakhrom, but leave clans like All-stars with monsters like Saki.
Course they could just release something to replace Uranus, but I haven't seen a good Sakhrom 3s in a really long time.

When you try to solve a problem, you created another problem.
How effective is it going to be? New clans dominate as well. Look at standard dailty toirnament for example

What are the use of most old cards but arent OP now? If you say they can be used in DT, not all clans excel in that format.
If you mention events, most creators arent going to specifically go through the bigger list to see which card isnt as OP.

I am glad the staff has ask us for our opinion. In elo, there will always be some certain cards or clans dominating. Look at survivor, DT. Conduct a research on who is playing what. I can tell you sentinel is probably one the most common clan in extended dt. As for survivor, uppers and sakrohm. What is the point of the other cards?

Then comes the argument of ... what about those close to obsolete cards?
UR made a wrong choice by making cards like Dj Korr cr when they first started and also introduce other cards that pale so much in comparison.

Before? Spyke, Kalindra, Mokra, any card that is made to sell packs or before it became apparent that a clan bonus was too good. You don't have to do anything drastic, just add the few guys who are always banned and who you couldn't ever print resonable alternatives to to the list (or even Cr them on top of it) and that's it.

If you dont know what is dominating the standard format or what has a good potential. Let me tell you. Sakrohm, uppers and possibly huracan. La junta is losing ground and was one of the best in there. Can I ask how balance eill the new cards be?

No. A card should only be banned for it being overpowered, not because it is old! Is it not better that old cards are being used, proving that the cards made earlier are still viable for the game? Would people really play Elo then? I mean you would just get the same boring clans all the time (Not like Elo isn't full of that, we all have our fair share of Huracan users), and I mean all the time.

Cr Prices would plummet drastically, do you seriously want that to happen again? I think it's nice that the more rich players of the game have a slight advantage with cards like Splata Cr and Kerozinn Cr, it's better to see the good old cards rather than these new extremely overpowered cards.

Although I think it's nice for UR to try to listen to comments from active users, not that all of them will be listened too though. Depending on the turn-out though, I hope UR acts for the better.

This isn't just a plot to get new people to buy new cards is it? That's ruining the dynamics of the game, losing you players and in turn money perhaps?

How on Earth did you come up with this theory? You want me to spell out the most obvious imbalanced cards in ELO? Hurracan and lizbeth who last time I checked were all new cards. Maybe some of the older uppers and freaks could use a tweek but none of them compare to lizbeth who is OP in an already strong clan and hurracan who were obviously over powered in an attempt to drive demand for New Blood packs. I don't know anyone who thinks all stars are even a problem, sure they are solid enough but they aren't so overpowered that everybody is using them like hurrican, piranas, freaks and rescue/uppers. Even uranus who you mentioned already gets banned regularly and isn't even that big of a problem by itself, only when combined with jautya who makes every fight a 50/50. These days there are plenty of cards similar to uranus, off the top of my head, spiaghi, steve/slyde, clover, sabia, pegh and more.

If the game wants to be balanced then how about starting by banning all new blood characters and voting them into elo instead of having another el divino and noctezuma fiasco? Start by regulating the new cards then go back and balance the older cards. I mean come on, letting vickie cr's little lucha nibre brother loose on ELO?...That was a troll right?

I personally like the idea of "retiring" older characters. That's what they do with MTG. Only the cards released in the current 3 sets (updated every four months/1 year maximum) are available for their main live tourney. I think eradicating some of the more expensive stuff will also give newer players a chance in ELO.